Search Results

1. LC v DB [2023] NZDT 161 (2 June 2023) [pdf, 104 KB]

   ...contribution to the repairs. LC says DB agreed to pay $3,000.00 towards the cost of the repairs, and he paid $1,000.00 but has refused to pay the balance of $2,000.00. LC claims payment by DB of $2,000.00. 2. DB did not attend the hearing as there was no response to the phone number attributed to him, and no defence to the claim was provided to the Tribunal. The absence of the respondent does not prevent the hearing going ahead. 3. The issues I need to decide are: a) Did LC an...

2. KM v LK [2023] NZDT 255 (28 June 2023) [pdf, 96 KB]

   ...checked that a replacement makeup artist would be available for the wedding. 8. On 1 March LK contacted KM by email and advised her that LK would not be able to do the wedding, but that an alternative makeup artist had been arranged. 9. KM’s response was to ask for a refund instead of a replacement makeup artist. LK said that would not be possible because the replacement had already been organised and LK had paid her. KM continued to say that she was not happy to have a replace...

3. ET v TM [2023] NZDT 453 (21 August 2023) [pdf, 178 KB]

   ...between the front right corner of [car 2] and the front left wheel area of [car 1]. 2. ET and her insurer B Ltd now claim the cost of repairs to [car 1] of $6,017.15. There were no uninsured losses. 3. The issues to be determined are: a) Who was responsible for the collision? b) What sum, if any, is TM liable to pay? Who was responsible for the collision? 4. The tort of negligence requires payment of compensation when someone breaches a duty of care to another person causing for...

4. LU v CW [2024] NZDT 734 (21 September 2024) [pdf, 130 KB]

   ...resolved are: a. Was a misrepresentation made about the vehicle sold to LU? b. If so, is LU entitled to compensation of $12,000.00? Was a misrepresentation made about the vehicle sold to LU? 5. Contract law says a buyer in a private sale has a responsibility to carry out due diligence before entering a contract. That principle is generally described as caveat emptor or, buyer beware. While the sale of goods is generally covered by Part 3 of the Contract and Commercial Law Act 2...

5. HRRT-Guide-on-How-to-Complete-and-Serve-a-Claim.pdf [pdf, 144 KB]

   ...you have initiated proceedings by filing a claim against them in the Tribunal. It provides the defendant(s) with the following information: • What they need to do, if they intend to defend the claim • When, how and where they must file the response to the claim • The consequences if they fail to file a response within the given timeframe. A Letter of Notification (Letter) is used to notify the relevant organisation(s) of your claim being filed with the Tribunal so that the o...

6. KW & TW v S Ltd [2024] NZDT 824 (17 October 2024) [pdf, 218 KB]

   ...be the result of wear and tear. As the areas of deterioration are in high use areas only, and as there is no deterioration in other areas, I find it more likely than not that it is a wear and tear and maintenance issue for which the homeowner is responsible. 10. The onus is always on an applicant to prove their claim. As it has not been proven that either the doors or the paintwork are defective, the claim must be dismissed. Referee: DTR Edwards Date: 17 October 2024...

7. TE & EE v UO [2024] NZDT 324 (1 May 2024) [pdf, 177 KB]

   ...$54,014.29 as a result of UO’s fraudulent conduct. [5] TE and EE have filed a claim for $30,000.00 against UO in the Disputes Tribunal, waiving the amount that exceeds that sum. [6] UO did not appear at the hearing, and has provided no defence or response to the claim to the Disputes Tribunal. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 3 The issues [7] As UO has been convicted in the District Court as described above, it is not necessary for me to make any decision as to t...

8. LL v KN [2024] NZDT 369 (27 June 2024) [pdf, 173 KB]

   ...satisfied that LL did remove a window stay connection and put cat litter in the garden, which should have been properly disposed of. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 3 Is KN entitled to claim $640.00 for damage? 9. While I have found that LL is responsible for some damage at the property, KN has not been able to prove that he has suffered any losses as a result of the damage. This is partly because it is very difficult to prove the cost to remedy some of these minor issues and b...

9. OQ v QM & ors [2024] NZDT 539 (22 July 2024) [pdf, 166 KB]

   ...“Working in and around Trees,” “Building on small sites – doing it Right,” email exchanges, photos and each party filed arborist reports from suitably qualified arborists. 9. In addition, the applicant filed a comprehensive and detailed response to the respondent’s arborist report, raising valid points. 10. In my view both expert reports, while exhibiting respective bias, essentially left open the possibility that the construction work interfered with the tree. The app...

10. MG v L Ltd [2024] NZDT 548 (23 July 2024) [pdf, 96 KB]

    ...details and asked him to send an invoice so we can pay him and he can reimburse you. 8. It appears to me that there was communication issues between the accounts team and TH. It is more likely than not TH was confused. Payments that L Ltd would be responsible for would be damage the tenant does to the property they have tenanted from L Ltd as a subtenant. The landlord (owner) would not be responsible. 9. L Ltd would not be liable in contract to pay for damage its tenant has cause...